Corporate America, Running Amuck

If you've been paying attention at all to the news lately, especially about corporations and what they're doing and doing to us Americans, it's likely you've been disheartened. I know I have been. And I don't even have high expectations of them.

First there was this, from AT&T, last October, putting unfounded charges on their customers bills:

AT&T Fined $105 Million by FTC for 'Cramming' Charges

Then there was this, a few weeks ago, again from and about AT&T and the way they supply internet service:

AT&T Fined $100M for Throttling 'Unlimited Data'

It seems AT&T said if you got internet from them, you'd have "unlimited data." Trouble was, they didn't bother to tell those same customers that when they got to a certain level of data usage, their internet speed would slow. Nice, huh?

Then there was this, yesterday, from Google, also on computers:

Google Secretly Spying On Computer Users

Then there was this from Whole Foods last year:

Whole Foods Will Pay $800,000 for Price-Gouging

Finally, not to be done there, this came out yesterday, too:

Afternoon Bulletin: Whole Foods in Legal Trouble for Inflating Prices (Again)

So for anyone, anyone who thinks we can or should do with little or no government, when corporations and the wealthy can do these kinds of things to us, I say they must be crazy.

Or they're part of these corporations and doing these very same things to us all.

I'm so old...

...I remember when the notifications, messages and friend requests on Facebook were at the left hand top of the page.

THAT old.

Irony: Maybe the robots will get it right

How would that be for irony?

We--humankind--created computers. Computers, therefore, enabled us to also create robots. At first, they were to do our work for us and that's where we are today.

It has been projected by some scientists--futurist scientists--that robots with their own artifical intelligence will, yes, take over the world.

If given enough time, it rather makes sense.

They already reprogram themselves and make themselves smarter and smarter. Smarter than we humans can make them.

So let's go with that thought--that is, robots "take over" the world. They then:

--do away with pollution since they realize it makes them work worse (sick) and eventually kills them;

--never experience any form of racism or discrimination of any kind because, after all, they're all just machines and therefore, equal;

--do away with war, wars and all warring weapons since it occurs to them that a) they need to work together and b) that logic, reasoning and communication are the way to handle problems and solve differences.

If it only stopped right there, the robots would be far, far ahead of humankind, to date.

Kind of sad, isn't it?

What they didn't tell you about using Bing

For anyone who cares and who pays attention to search engines and the progress of the internet, I thought this brief article, today, in The New York Times was interesting.

It seems, if you're going to flip over and use bing for your search, there's something you ought to know. That is:

"Last week, when Microsoft gave a reporter early access to the new version of Bing, a message in the search bar of the product indicated that all the search terms entered on Bing could be shared with friends in a Facebook social network."

Oh, joy.

One more place our information is not only shown to everyone else but collected and--yes--no doubt sold to other companies.

Yeehaw, eh?

Link: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/going-social-but-not-creepy-in-the-new-bing/

I'm so old...

...I remember when Facebook didn't always keep "refreshing" so that when you were reading something, it would stay right in front of you and not disappear who knows where.

TKC reports: $1m "Emergency" IT Contract at City Hall

As Tony reports today on his blog (http://www.tonyskansascity.com/), the city of Kansas City, Missouri apparently just let a contract for one million dollars for an "emergency" IT contract. Three things come to me, right away: First, I hope it was competed, competed fairly and wisely and they can prove it. Second, seriously, as said in the comments section at Tony's blog---why couldn't/didn't they find someone local who would supply these services? I find it difficult to believe there aren't companies here in the area--in the city itself?--that can't and don't supply them. Third and finally, was this contract rushed through? And if it was, why and by whom? Let's hope it wasn't. Now we need a Russ Ptacek-type reporter SOMEWHERE in this town--the Star? KMBC? KSHB? KCTV? somehere--to go do some digging on this and find out at least that much about this contract. It's not so much to ask. Link: http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/Documents/Document.aspx?q=FJdztn5pZS50Yvhu0FN92nVbLLjL49qzHW30zeQ6AjxFZ84X8ymz7wOiRYRgkDFa

More transitioning from TV only to computers

Are you aware of this yet? Comedian/political commentator Bill Maher of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" is taking his political humor and satire standup show online to Yahoo!. It is to air this Thursday at 9:30 pm Central time. It should be interesting, at least, if not fascinating. I predict it will be wildly successful, first, and that it will herald the further shifting of more media events AWAY from television--or strictly television--and more and more to streaming to TV AND the internet. Also, as this is done, if the source is wanting a younger and younger audience, it will go far more purely to a computer-only stream. Now, before any of you "oldsters" panic, keep in mind that, if you get current and updated, your computer can or will be able to hook straight into your television monitor so relax. Stay tuned, so to speak (no pun intended). This will get more and more interesting. It will also accelerate very soon, too, this transition. Links: http://screen.yahoo.com/crazystupidpolitics/?SR=sr3_50373111_go; http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/business/media/young-people-are-watching-but-less-often-on-tv.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha25

Great graphics

I don't play--and never will--computer games but I loved Star Wars--the first three movies, anyway--and have to say, the graphics for this game look outstanding. That's all.

Quote of the day

"Man robbing bank with gun gets life. Man robbing world with bank gets bonus" --Anonymous guy on the internet

No more drive-in theaters?

There's an interesting, if possibly sad, article out right now at the BBC site, pointing out that the drive-in movie theater may be all but dead. At the height of the drive-in's popularity--way back in 1958--we peaked at 4,063 of the buggers. Yowza. Now? We have a total of 374 sites in the US with 618 screens. Big drop, for sure. With the next shift coming of going digital, it will require approximately $112,000 per projector and housing to make the switch. The conclusion I come to, folks? If you enjoy a drive-in theater, you'd better get to it next Summer. (Pass the popcorn, will you?) Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15930813

Facebook's continued weird evolution

Facebook is getting spookier and spookier. 

I typed in an note to a friend about John Turturro, the actor/director, earlier today and immediately a note came up for a John Turturro "like" page.

And then "The Big Lebowski".

Immediately.

Then, upon doing a Google search for Facebook, up comes this today:

Facebook Red-Faced as Clumsy Google Smear Campaign Is Discovered


Facebook execs must be red-faced with embarrassment.

The social-networking giant Facebook has been caught red-handed in a secret smear campaign against industry rival Google, FoxNews.com has confirmed.

According to a report from The Daily Beast Wednesday night, Facebook hired leading public-relations firm Burson-Marsteller to “pitch anti-Google stories to newspapers, urging them to investigate claims that Google was invading people’s privacy.” 

USA Today described the scandal as an undercover “whisper campaign” against the search giant, one leaving Silicon Valley insiders wondering who was playing dirty. Initial fingers pointed at perennial competitors and long-time industry behemoths Microsoft and Apple. Turns out it was the new kid on block instead -- Facebook.

When questioned early Thursday morning about these stunning allegations, Burson-Marsteller quickly backpedaled emphasizing that these kinds of campaigns go against its corporate code.

It seems the more we see of Mark Zuckerberg and his and his company's tactics, the more it looks as though his detractors may be correct in their disparaging descriptions of what he's capable of.

If it isn't true, he needs to start making it clear otherwise.

Weird title for a story on the internets

Most popular baby names released

I don't know who kidnapped them...  

(Absolutely no pun intended)


Have a great weekend, y'all.

After Friday, blocking tweets will be commonplace

Mark the date:

The British Royal Wedding

Tweeting banned from Westminster Abbey

Event organizers install technology to block guests from using their cell phones during the ceremony.

Thoughts on TV last evening

---Why are so many (all?) of the shows for the Fox Channel "Viewer Discretion Advised"?  House?  Really?

---Why would ANYONE want a "Windows phone"?  Aren't there enough problems with the software in the form of viruses and bugs that you'd be thrilled to NOT have an electronic gadget that was based on Microsoft's Windows program?

Really.  I don't get it.  Either one.

I'm so old...

I remember when email DIDN'T have video advertising attached to them.



And they just "go off" if you merely drag the cursor across them.

Man it's obnoxious.

I'm so old...

...I remember when Facebook didn't automatically update itself, right in front of your eyes.  You always had to update.

:)

Where the internet is headed--and it's not good

From Joe.My.God. today:

An Ontario internet provider is the first in Canada to impose greatly lowered usage caps on its customers. This move comes in response to the exploding popularity of heavy-bandwidth sites like Netflix. Customers who exceed their contracted usage will page steep fees.

Starting on March 1, Ontario TekSavvy members who subscribed to the 5Mbps plan have a new usage cap of 25GB, "substantially down from the 200GB or unlimited deals TekSavvy was able to offer before the CRTC's decision to impose usage based billing," the message added. By way of comparison, Comcast here in the United States has a 250GB data cap. Looks like lots of Canadians can kiss that kind of high ceiling goodbye. And going over will cost you: according to TekSavvy, the CRTC put data overage rates at CAN $1.90 per gigabyte for most of Canada, and $2.35 for the country's French-speaking region.

Bottom line: no more unlimited buffet. TekSavvy users who bought the "High Speed Internet Premium" plan at $31.95 now get 175GB less per month. "Extensive web surfing, sharing music, video streaming, downloading and playing games, online shopping and email," could put users over the 25GB cap, TekSavvy warns. Also, watch out "power users that use multiple computers, smartphones, and game consoles at the same time."

So not only are some internet providers charging users much more for the same service, they are charging the providers more to deliver that content.


This is not good, ultimately, for the internet--unless you're a provider--and it's not good for the middle- and lower-classes, folks.  This will follow the golden rule of the world that "them with the gold makes the rules" and, worse, Ray Charles' lament that "them that has, gets."


If you're a poor schmuck, you'll have access to less information and entertainment, that's all there is to it.


The way of the world, sadly.

Fortunately Transportation Secretary LaHood agrees

Driving Under the Influence of Facebook

By Jerry Edgerton

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood may not be friending General Motors — and certainly not at 60 miles an hour. Just as LaHood’s annual conference on combating distracted driving was about to start, GM’s OnStar announced it was developing ways to let you update your Facebook page from your car with voice commands. Secretary LaHood’s response: “Let’s put safety before entertainment.” In television interviews he said he thought Facebook in the car was a bad idea.

I mean, come on.  I don't care if you are big on Facebook, no one really needs to update their status that bad, even and maybe especially if they've had a wreck.  Please.

Common sense, anyone?

Link to original story:  http://moneywatch.bnet.com/saving-money/blog/cars-money/driving-under-the-influence-of-facebook/1624/

Facebook? In your car?

Listening to KCUR/NPR yesterday, I heard a story about technology in cars and drivers being distracted, etc.

From what they said, OnStar is considering making it possible to update your Facebook status through their service.

Right.

Anyone else think this might be insane?

And if not insane, how about totally unnecessary?

Link to story:  http://www.npr.org/2011/01/25/133218198/can-drivers-handle-more-gadgets-some-say-no

The biggest--and most overlooked--event of the last year, bar none

Submittal:  The Stuxnet virus was the single-biggest event of the last year, barring anything even worse that wasn't actually released to the public's attention.


First, what Stuxnet is, from Wikipedia:  Stuxnet is a computer worm targeted at industrial equipment^[1] that was first discovered in July 2010 by VirusBlokAda, a security firm based in Belarus. While it is not the first time that hackers have targeted industrial systems,^[2] it is the first discovered worm that spies on and reprograms industrial systems,^[3] and the first to include a programmable logic controller (PLC) rootkit.^[4][5] It was specifically written to attack Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control and monitor industrial processes.^[6] Stuxnet includes the capability to reprogram the PLCs and hide its changes.^[7]


Next, then, on the ramifications of this new "computer worm":


Russian digital security company Kaspersky Labs released a statement that described Stuxnet as "a working and fearsome prototype of a cyber-weapon that will lead to the creation of a new arms race in the world."


Perhaps the ultimate tribute to it was by a computer security expert who called its advent—and the swath of destruction it cut through Iran's nuclear program—"an Oppenheimer moment" in the history of hacking. A moment in which malware viruses had made the leap from troublemaking but controllable depredations to potentially unstoppable, history-changing weapons, their capabilities miles ahead of their predecessors', the way the first nuclear weapon Oppenheimer built at Los Alamos left mere TNT in its wake and shadowed the world we live in with the threat of cataclysmic extinction.


Computer-security experts who have handled the most complex "malware" virus infections are agog.


More:


But an Oppenheimer moment means more than a quantum leap in the power and deceptiveness of the virus. It means dramatic geopolitical ramifications. If the original Oppenheimer moment may have guaranteed that WWII would end with the horrific Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings, the Stuxnet Oppenheimer moment may have bequeathed us an unexpected last-minute reprieve from what seemed like a potential outbreak of nuclear warfare. Consider the fact that Stuxnet disabled Iran's key nuclear facilities (and infected an estimated 60,000 of its computers) just at the moment whenthe Israelis were giving out signals that they were prepared to use air strikes on Iranian facilities, using whatever weapons it took (and, of course, they have an undeclared nuclear arsenal), to prevent Iran from getting the bomb. Whatever you think of the Israeli position, there was little doubt they'd do it if there were no other options, and in doing so risk not only Iranian retaliation but nuclear retaliation from Iranian sympathizers in Pakistan's military, which all-too-loosely controls Pakistan's "Islamic bomb," the generic term for the 60 to 100 nuclear warheads the Pakistanis possess.


Finally, on what nearly happened last year, it is thought:


"The world was on the verge of a regional nuclear war with unknowable further consequences. 


Until Stuxnet did its work."  --Ron Rosenbaum, from his article "Stuxnet and the triumph of hacker culture", Slate Magazine


This last quote, above,  is, by itself, pretty remarkable, I think, for what it suggests we came perilously close to--I wonder how many other such events we've almost had--but what's also remarkable is the term "regional nuclear war".  Yeah, right.  As if.  There would--will?--be nothing "regional" about a nuclear war, anywhere in the world, but particularly if it begins in the Middle East, let there be no doubt.


Apparently the Middle East, at least, nearly literally blew up in nuclear war last year, folks.  


The good news is that nuclear war was averted.


The bad news is that now a "pandora's box" of computer virus "missiles" and all that entails are now released on the world.


Let's hope it's all in humankind's favor... forever and ever, amen.




Have a good weekend, y'all.


Try to think happy thoughts.


Link to original article:  http://www.slate.com/id/2281938/?from=rss
Link to definition of Stuxnet:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet